On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 03:14:05PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:25:50AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > It should go into your devel-testing branch as this must be applied on > > top of my xip_zdata branch that you merged there. > > Thanks, it would've been good to have known that ahead of time. > > It's why the patch system has the KernelVersion: tag: > > 6. Kernel version. > On a separate line, add a tag "KernelVersion: " followed by the kernel > version that the patch was generated against. This should be formatted > as "KernelVersion: 2.6.0-rmk1" > > This is because that information is relevant for knowing where it should > be applied, and to which branch. Having it be something else means I > have to guess, and that can result in the patch being discarded in this > manner if I don't find where it's supposed to be applied. > > Yes, I know it's a pain to have to supply this information, but giving > accurate information there makes things a lot easier and quicker when > applying patches, rather than playing a game of "guess where it needs > to be applied, nope, doesn't apply there, try somewhere else." > > Various people in the kernel community have different solutions to this. > For example, on netdev, it is preferred to state whether you want your > patch to be applied to "net" or "net-next" by adding that into the > "[PATCH ...]" tag in the subject line. It's really about streamlining > the patch submission and application process. The tag can take a plain kernel version and a kernel version suffixed with a shortened git hash (please avoid the full hash, it doesn't display well with the web presentation, and will probably be truncated when it's inserted into the database.) -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
